From your website:
Math Operators - In this version you can no longer perform advanced distance or direction recall functions that include math operators. For example you can no longer do something like 3..4+2. We are now expecting the user to use the calculator to apply mathematical operations to distances or directions. Just remember that in the new version double tapping any field that has a value in it will automatically be copied into the calculator

So now to set a point 90 degrees off a line you're going to force me to inverse out the bearing, send it to the calculator, change it to decimal degrees, subtract 90 from it, change it back to DMS, and finally send it back to the calculations screen? Typing in '1..2-90' seems a lot easier to me.

Perhaps this is related, but the FG2007 desktop version doesn't seem to like entering quadrant bearings in the 1,2,3,4 format anymore. eg entering "190" in the traverse screen gives me S10W, not N90E. I hope this isn't another new 'feature'.

You can recall the bearing by typing 1..2 in the direction field, then double tap on it to copy that recalled distance into the calculator. Then enter 90 and press the DMS- button. You do not need to convert to decimal degrees.

For entering quadrants you can use NE for quadrant 1, SW for quadrant 3, etc.

Brian Sloman wrote:You can recall the bearing by typing 1..2 in the direction field, then double tap on it to copy that recalled distance into the calculator. Then enter 90 and press the DMS- button. You do not need to convert to decimal degrees.

For entering quadrants you can use NE for quadrant 1, SW for quadrant 3, etc.

You mean it is a new feature? Sheesh, I thought i was being funny. I seem to be losing more features with each release than gaining.

Bashing the program on here is not professional. And I think is not a way to get anything you want changed back if thats possible. There are other sources for Data Collection software but like Surey Joe said, I doubt you'll complain about FG once you try and see what the competition has to offer. Feield Genius by far, hands down, blows the other competitions programs not only in functionality, but in speed and graphics also.

Things change, we adapt. Its nothing new with ANY software you get. Look at Autocad, Civil 3d, or Carlsons software, ect ect ect....Somethings get changed to make other new items function much smoother.....

As many of you know there was no consistency with what inputs were allowed in direction or distance fields throughout FieldGenius. So to make the product easier to learn, more flexible and more powerful we decided to completely re-write our units class. In doing so we added support for Feet and inches, grads, decimal degrees, radians, angle precision, distance precision, robust units converting and more.

All distance and direction fields now have the ability to interpret more intelligently user entries. I suggest that everyone review the “Calculating With FieldGenius” section in the new FieldGenius 2007 manual to learn more.

To handle all this new functionality our units class has a lot to do and one area that added complexity was allowing the user to enter math operators and numeric quadrant codes. So we decided to remove this functionality and now expect the user to start relying more on using the calculator for calculating. Besides isn't that what a calculator is for?

We don't wake up in the morning and come to work to make our products harder to use. Instead, we come to work and talk about what can we do to make our product more flexible, consistent and easier to use. We are not afraid to try different things, we like to experiment and our goal is to make software that helps you do what you do more efficiently. What I ask of you and the rest of our customers is to give the new units class a good test over the next couple of months. After which I would love to hear what you think.

No offense Jason, but I agree with Grant that 1..2+?? is by far the best and fastest way to work.
"So we decided to remove this functionality and now expect the user to start relying more on using the calculator for calculating. Besides isn't that what a calculator is for? "
I don't want to use a calculator, that's why I bought my first data collector. Having to enter the addition/subtraction etc. into the calculator then take the value and enter it into the direction/distance field is one more source for error. Getting a direction or distance value with the least number of values manually entered into the collector reduces the chances for error. Fact.
It would be greatly appreciated by this user, and I'm sure many more, if the 1..2+?? were put back in the programming.
Best regards,
Gord

I am not in the field much anymore and our firm doesn't use your data collector so my reason for this response is to confirm that the princple of 1..2+ ?? is by far the simplest way to go.

I certainly hope that you are not planning on incorporating this change into your office program (MSCAD2005????) method of calculating.

It may be worth considering when you are anticipating changing the processes in newer versions of your software that you send out some trial balloons and get some feedback from your users before you take away a good thing. After all the users are the ones that really are the most affected by such changes

I agree that the "old way" was easier, but also agree that the "new way" is better than anything that is offered in the Trimble or SDR software we swithched from, and has more options than before using the built in calculator. Using our old data collectors we had to inverse between points, then write that in a book or on your hand or best case carry a calulator with you then add or subtract then key that in and hope in all that there were not an mistakes in copying numbers back and forth. If there were mistakes we had no "cogo history" files to recall where the numbers came from. I'm not saying I know Trimble or SDR so well that there wasn't an easier way but I do know there was never a " comment box" we could put suggestions into. If MS programmers want to change back, keep the new way, or allow both would be even better. I think as fast as things have advanced in survey software in the last few years we sometimes forget where we came from and we always have the option not to upgrade if we have a version we really like or re-install the old one if we did use the "FREE UPGRADE" (awesome). "You can't please all of the people all of the time."

I agree with the guys, the 1..2+ was a much easier method than the calculator, especially in the ANGLE fields. I'm not saying the calculator is bad. It just went from getting your answer in 5 keystrokes to 10 keystrokes. then wondering..did I convert my angle to decimals and then back for the answer, ect ect ect.....plus I think it covered all 4 quadrants if I remember right. I guess to make my point.....the less I have to enter in.....the less chances I have to enter in something wrong. Eliminate as much human error as possible. The 1..2+ was a simple straight forward way of getting what you wanted.

I'd like to see it back, but not if that means other function being cut due to program size. If I remember right, there was a chat about "with all the new function, keeping both function (1..2+ and the calculator) took up too much space"....then I think we can work around it. If loosing one function gave space for 5 other functions to work smoother...than its a simple answer whether to bring it back or not.

If we have to keep using it in future versions, I would like to see the bearing calculator we chatted about earlier to at least solve the quadrant problem if thats possible.

1) From which edit box are these calculations being performed?2) What is the frequency of these calculations?3) Describe the purpose of doing these calculations?

Hi again Jason, thanks for not only listening but asking.
The most common use for the 1..2+ for us is planting intermediate bars along a straight line (say 3 to 4) that is not occupied. From a traverse point, we would be set on 1, backsight 2 and turn an angle through a clearing (eg.) that would be good to plant a random bar on line. (say 45d30'30")
Intersect the boundary line 3..4 with 1..2+45.3030 for a point to stakeout. Quick an easy, there's no need for the DC to record the angle.
That's just one example, I haven't been out much so I'll have to ask the PC what he thinks.
Cheers,
Gord

I don't think it could get any easier than FG2006 to calc bearings and what not. From the sounds of things FG2007 has alot of new great features but took away one of the best features from previous versions. It would be nice to see an update keeping all the new features but revert back to the old way of calculating bearings and avoid sending it to the calculator. This is the main reason i don't want to upgrade to FG2007 yet and will not upgrade unless it changes. I'm happy with FG2006 right now.

I too find the old way to enter new directions (1..2-90) easier to use, probably just old habits..

However, on the subject of keying in more numbers, I have found that when utilizing the enclosure for the Tracker in cold weather, it is extremely easy to key in an incomplete number due to the stiffness of the plastic cover over the screen...

Your wait will soon be over. We are adding bearing and distance recall and the math operators back to FieldGenius, and will be in the next 2012 release.This was an important function to you, and we have recognized this. We may have been wrong in disabling this functionality.You complained and we listened. Thank you all for your feedback. This user forum is important to us so please continue voicing your opinions.We are listening.